Obama campaign surrogates taken to task on the Sunday talk shows over Reid’s tax accusations

posted at 2:56 pm on August 6, 2012 by Dustin Siggins

Ed hit this over the weekend, noting that if the Obama campaign really wanted Reid to stop making unsourced allegations, it would and he would. Ed’s not the only one making this clear, however — Candy Crowley hammered Robert Gibbs on “State of the Union” yesterday, as I pointed out on the Media Research Center’s blog this morning:

Crowley asked [Gibbs] if the campaign was happy with the accusations Reid was leveling, since a Democrat in touch with the re-election campaign had told her “if Chicago wanted Reid to stop, he would stop.” Gibbs ducked the question by talking about tax loopholes and “knowing” what is in the taxes people are paying. Crowley stopped him by stating that Romney didn’t make the loopholes, and pointed out that even the Swiss bank account Gibbs railed against was not used or invested in illegally…Crowley then asked twice, and stated once, about Chicago’s willingness to tell Reid to stop making unsourced allegations. Gibbs pointedly ignored the question, and simply stated that Romney could put the whole thing to rest by releasing his returns. He also said he doesn’t think anyone controls what Reid says or does, but Crowley didn’t let him slide — she slammed him for this misleading statement, noting that if the Obama campaign wanted him to stop, he would.

Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL) was similarly treated by George Stephanopoulos on This Week, though Stephanopoulos focused more on the incredulous idea that Wasserman-Schultz would actually defend Reid’s unsourced allegation:

Wasserman-Schultz…said she “didn’t know” who Reid had spoken to, but that “Mitt Romney could clear this up in ten seconds” if he released the 23 years of tax returns he gave to Senator McCain (R-AZ) in 2008. Stephanopoulos then said he “can’t believe you [Wasserman-Schultz] believe it’s okay to make an allegations like that…with no evidence.” After letting Wasserman-Schultz continue to twist in the wind, he said “I take it from your answer you’re not going to repudiate Senator Reid’s charge,” at which point the Chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee said questions have been raised about Romney’s taxes, and said he “owes” the American people answers on his time at Bain Capital, his overseas investment, etc. Stephanopoulos interrupted her to point out nobody except for Reid is making the accusation Reid made, but Wasserman-Schultz continued to ignore the question.

This reminds me of the old quote about how the Roman people were distracted by bread and circuses even as Rome itself fell. The Sunday talk shows are supposed to address substantive, important issues with some of the top political players of the week, month, year, era, etc. Yet too often, and epitomized yesterday, these and other political media outlets would rather focus on political tit-for-tat instead of actually addressing the economy’s slow stagger to recovery, Obama’s approval of assassination of American citizens, the failure of the GOP to hold the line on spending, etc.

In this case, of course, they are not entirely to blame; the decision by Huffington Post to first publish the accusations basically dictated that the shows address what Reid said. Huffington forced action by other outlets as well — this is my second post on the subject for Hot Air, for example, and both Ed and AllahPundit have blogged about Reid’s claims at least twice. I know the three of us would like to focus on improving the country, not engaging in political drama, but here we are.

What is the balance? Should Reid’s outrageous accusations be addressed by Megyn Kelly, Ed, AP, Crowley, Stephanopoulos, etc.? Or should they be ignored in the hope that the accusations die quickly as the news cycle moves along? Either approach has risk to it, but it seems like even the most honest and well-intentioned of political journalists and commentators get caught up in such soap operas on a regular basis.

Note: A little less than two hours before this went up, but after I’d completed the original post above, Ed posted about an article in The Hill pointing out that ducking the question is not limited to Obama’s campaign surrogates — it’s now spread to the White House’s Press Secretary. From the article:

Carney maintained that Reid has been known to speak his mind on issues. When pressed if it was appropriate to weigh in on the Romney matter, the White House spokesman said, “I would ask your question of Sen. Reid.”

“Only Senator Reid knows his source, which he has discussed, and I would refer you to that,” Carney said.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

It’s possible that Richard Cohen’s column today really turned the knife. The White House can smell that the stink is starting to rub off on Obama now. Of course, they still won’t tell Harry to clean up his mess.

But at least we had an indication that our media does still have a pulse, however faint it may be.

If Wasserman Schultz would only provide her lack of criminal history, regarding any possible prostitution, dope smuggling, child stealing, lesbian porn with a minor, and lewd conduct with a barnyard animal charges, “she could clear this up in ten seconds.”

Coworker starts saying he heard from someone in the office that you were embezzling money. Or neighbor tells the block that they heard that you are cheating on your wife.

Lowest of the damn low…shows how desperate and pathetic they are they we’re months out and this is the best they’ve got. I get politics get nasty, but between this and Romney might be a felon, all time low.

How many prominent dems are known tax cheats? Daschle, Gaithner and Rangel have all pled guilty recently. Known and admitted to tax fraud. And let’s face it, a majority of dem voters don’t pay any income tax at all. Romney has paid millions in taxes.

Hey Obama, how do you plan to improve the economy with a senate majority leader that won’t budget?

Don’t for a minute think all this is motivated by genuine distaste for what Reid is doing. The MSM is just worried about the damage this is doing to the Obama campaign and this is their not so subtle message that we won’t be advancing this narrative for you, try another one.

The Sunday talk shows are supposed to address substantive, important issues with some of the top political players of the week, month, year, era, etc.

That has never been true. It’s always been pure partisan politics on the Sunday shows.

the idea that there was some yesteryear when people honestly and reasonably debated “big” issues is complete hogwash. The same is true of campaign politics in general.

But, this goes to a much more telling media bias issue. If some high-ranking republican made similar accusations of malfeasance against Obama – would the press cover the allegations in the same way – or would the story be about the terrible partisanship of the republicans?

I think we know the answer. These allegations are covered the way they are covered in order to help Obama. the idea that a sitting Senator – Harry Reid – can accuse a citizen of a crime (tax evasion) – using his position of power to do so – with no consequences to Reid and no outrage by the media, shows how far we have sunk. This is abuse of power and abuse of the gov’t against its citizens of the highest order. Reid should be arrested and run out on a rail and tarred and feathered. He should be punished severely for his deeds.

He is as foul a person as we have in America and he is beloved by his party and the left. I certainly hope the left likes the idea of a Republican Administration and Republican Senators using gov’t power the same way in the future. Apparently, it is perfectly acceptable to use gov’t power to accuse your electoral opponents of felonies, etc.

The media knows the more it dwells on this issue, pro or con, the more they distract from the issue of Obama’s record. Which was the entire reason Harry made up his story in the first place. Whether they are disagreeing with him or agreeing with him, as long as they are talking about him and not Obama then Harry has accomplished his objective.

The media knows the more it dwells on this issue, pro or con, the more they distract from the issue of Obama’s record. Which was the entire reason Harry made up his story in the first place. Whether they are disagreeing with him or agreeing with him, as long as they are talking about him and not Obama then Harry has accomplished his objective.

tommyboy on August 6, 2012 at 3:21 PM

True enough. Tactically, it can be pretty effective as a short term manuever, or as a time buyer. When someone like Reid says this, you can’t afford to just let it go unchallenged, so it does serve as an excellent distraction. Again, short term.

However, it shows a lot of weakness when you step back and look at the big picture. These guys are in big trouble once Romney gets more and more opportunities to reach out directly to people, and they know it.

That would only be because the version of Liberal McCarthyism they practice is more subtle and nuanced. Most of the time, that is. Except when they get caught and exposed, as Brian Ross recently was.

Reid’s obvious populist class warfare McCarthyism is embarrassing to them. There is nothing subtle or nuanced about it. But what did they expect? He is basically an unsophisticated fly-over country liberal. He is not from either coast. Nor is he from Chicago.

Anymore, every time I watch Gibbs, Axelrod or Wasserman-Schultz trying to get a point across it’s like there squirming around in their seats trying to justify their answer. I have yet to see them give a straight answer to a direct question.

I don’t ever want to hear the Left whine about how Romney “has to do something” about some fringe person’s comment. If BO doesn’t think he is accountable for Reid, Romney certainly isn’t responsible for anything some unknown GOPer says.

Brave approach – to stay quiet in the face of blatant slander and demagoguery? Strange definition of bravery, especially concerning a guy who vowed to bring a higher political game to the nation. He should be condemned for his feckless opportunism in the matter.

Gibbs & Wassername may suspect a trap. A couple of extra years of returns might show up and they will again look stupid and nasty. Either way, apart from the moron segment of the population this issue isn’t catching on. Crazy, the condition this country is in & they’re talking this crap?
Reid of course is an abomination to the human race.

The Sunday talk shows are supposed to address substantive, important issues with some of the top political players of the week, month, year, era, etc. Yet too often, and epitomized yesterday, these and other political media outlets would rather focus on political tit-for-tat instead of actually addressing the economy’s slow stagger to recovery, Obama’s approval of assassination of American citizens, the failure of the GOP to hold the line on spending, etc.

If the media is really so offended by Reid, they could simply shut up about his clownish allegations even if he won’t. It was “news” the first time he said it. It isn’t now.
If they declined to discuss it any further and did not allow guests to bring it up either Reid will shut up and the story will die.

I think 7 weeks lines up with the strategy of not using the teleprompter…30 minutes of dead air is not going to win any votes (a President looking at the pretty butterflies works for about 30 seconds but only once).

What is the balance? Should Reid’s outrageous accusations be addressed by Megyn Kelly, Ed, AP, Crowley, Stephanopoulos, etc.? Or should they be ignored in the hope that the accusations die quickly as the news cycle moves along?

Unfortunately, when the Leader of the “greatest deliberative body” in the world starts throwing around accusations like he is the mayor of Crazytown…it is newsworthy.

I think Romney should offer to release his tax returns, but demand disclosures from the other side in return: One year in exchange for Obama’s college, law school, law firm and State Senate records. One year in exhange for 10 years of Harry Reid’s returns, along with records of his land dealings. One year in exchange for 10 years of Pelosi’s retuns. One year in exchange for records of meetings with lobbyists at the Starbucks across from the White House. Etc., etc., etc. The finale of course is 3 years in exchange for the withheld fast and furious documents.

Oh, and don’t tell them what disclosures give them what years. Release a random year every time one of the conditions is met.

Yet too often, and epitomized yesterday, these and other political media outlets would rather focus on political tit-for-tat instead of actually addressing the economy’s slow stagger to recovery, Obama’s approval of assassination of American citizens, the failure of the GOP to hold the line on spending, etc.

This is a really silly criticism. These outrageous lies made by Harry Reid and seconded by Pelosi and Little Debbie should be addressed – and for once we can thank the lamestream media for doing their job and not just parroting the Demobrats talking points.

What is the balance? Should Reid’s outrageous accusations be addressed by Megyn Kelly, Ed, AP, Crowley, Stephanopoulos, etc.? Or should they be ignored in the hope that the accusations die quickly as the news cycle moves along?

I don’t like the way you’ve framed this Dustin. Spurious accusations should be ignored because they are bogus. The way you’ve set this up it sounds as if you think there is something to hide. I don’t think that was your intent but that is how it comes across to me.

In a previous post I made the argument that the dems were trying to be clever with the english language. We conservatives were doing what we always do. Take the dems literally and not understand their full argument. Reids accusations was not that Romney didn’t file and pay his taxes according to his return. He was stretching the definition of he didn’t pay his taxes. What Reid really meant was that he didn’t pay the full rate according to his income (fair share.)Because Romney made a portion of his income through capital gains this allowed Romney’s taxabel rate to be lower than someone earned income is through wages. Also the reason the dems want his returns public is to highlight any tax cuts or credits Romney may have taken advatage of and claim that only someone rich can take advantage of these ‘credit’ or ‘cuts.’
When we understand this is what the dems really want to highlight then we can come up with a more effective way to deal with this issue.
I say the taxable income for capital gains and earned income should be the same and no loop holes at a 15% rate. To me it would be much more fair to flaten the taxable rate rather than flatening ones income.

I have seen a lot of speculation about who at the IRS might have (illegally) revealed Romney’s records to the DNC/Obama, some about his own accountants (undoubtedly at least an office-full, also illegally), but none about this possibility:

Wasserman-Schultz…said she “didn’t know” who Reid had spoken to, but that “Mitt Romney could clear this up in ten seconds” if he released the 23 years of tax returns he gave to Senator McCain (R-AZ) in 2008.

Are all of McCain’s past staffers so ethically pure that none of them can be suspected?

We all know what this is. Its becoming more apparent how dirty Harry has made his millions. Hes the designated Dem fall boy. Im sure as we speak the DNC is cutting Harry a big ol check and patting him on the back. Hes doing Obamas dirty work by trying to distract everyones attention from the economy. The problem is that so many folks have been adversly affected by the economy there is no way to distract us. Even morons who voted for Obama are losing their jobs. No one gives a rats patootie about Mitts tax returns.

I know the three of us would like to focus on improving the country, not engaging in political drama, but here we are.

Oh stop with the BS Siggins. You guys like to stir the pot as much as anyone else in the media. It generates clicks and you know it. Stop your idiotic pandering, we are not democrats. They enjoy being lied to.